Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Firebeetle" data-source="post: 6227578" data-attributes="member: 34506">I've been in grad school AGAIN and missed out the premiere of the D&D Next bard. I'm the guy who started the 700 reply poll in which over 400 people said the bard sucked the most in 3.5, and gave some withering attacks of the 3.5 bard on these here boards. I LOVE playing bard, but hate how the class has been structured for so many editions. It's a serious kick in the teeth, the new/old bard. The 4e bard was everything I could hope it to be. Instead of building on that success, we have a regurgitated 3.5 bard that still looks like a stinky pile of puke. There are little improvements, I like that Bardic Knowledge has some definition finally and the colleges hold some promise. It ends there. Issues are namely:1.) 1st level bites, AGAIN. Developers, please play a 1st level bard and then see if you're excited to play him again at the level after the session. It's not going to happen. It's so easy to beef this guy up too (see 2 & 3 below). 2.) No bluff buff. Again, the number one expectation for bards is that they will talk the party out of trouble again and again. Yet, there is no buff to Bluff or Diplomacy AGAIN. What the hell? Bards should have the gift of blarney, period. Put in a bluff buff please, perhaps a bonus to all charisma skills would fit in.3.) No ability to talk to everyone. D&D languages are always a problem mechanic. They are often ignored anyway. Give the bard a "Sacajawea" ability to speak to anyone on a basic level. This makes the most of that bluff buff that should be added from 2 above. 4.) The spell list sucks. Bards deserve their own spell list or similar ability list. 4e did wonders here. The current spell list looks a lot like the old one. It gives no flavor to the bard, and simply casts the bard as "spare mage/cleric". I'd rather have the bardic music abilities expanded or a unique spell list. 5.) The ability list is really random AGAIN. It's obvious that the original bard writeup for 3e back in the LATE 90s was not very inspired when it was written. Do we still have to suffer for it now? I'd like a rewritten class that has a lot of clarity. Counterspell? Really? There is a lot of "Well, you know, that could be useful" stuff, which usually isn't very useful.  6.) Instead of being second best at everything, how about bard players can choose what they are good at, skills they pick up. One bard may never be rogueish, he's very good at knowing a lot of stuff. Another bard is great at picking locks and pockets. Another bard is great swordplay. Instead of a bunch of substandard abilities, how about the choice about what sort of bard you want to play with bardish abilities that back that up? The swordfighting bard can taunt his opponents, the rogueish bard is a good con man, the knowledgeable bard can have occasional, automatic high rolls to know the weirdest and most eclectic crap. Etc, etc. This bard is a dealbreaker for me. I'm NOT going back to playing crappy bards anymore. Please fix this Wotc. Let the barrage of BS excuses why the bard is okay and how I must be a substandard player with no skill if I don't see the value of the crappy bard begin. I've given up all faith that an EN World board will do something constructive like talk about the class instead of attacking me.</blockquote>

Verification